According to a 2019 UN report on women’s progress, women generally spend an average of 4.1 hours/day on unpaid household and care work compared to 1.7 hours/day for men. Such pre-pandemic statistics saw an exponential rise as COVID-19 swept the globe starting in early 2020. The situation is no different in the Philippines where the pandemic magnified not only the unpaid household and care work experienced by women but also exacerbated gender-based violence. This paper discusses how working women in the Philippines are burdened not only by the so-called second shift (Hochschild, 1989) but also by a more nuanced third shift (Kramarae, 2001) as they juggle the demands of work-from-home arrangements with their family responsibilities while navigating online education for themselves and their children in the midst of the pandemic.
{"title":"Work from/for Home: Recommendations to Ease Post-Pandemic Multiple Burden on Women","authors":"Emily Sanchez Salcedo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3875087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3875087","url":null,"abstract":"According to a 2019 UN report on women’s progress, women generally spend an average of 4.1 hours/day on unpaid household and care work compared to 1.7 hours/day for men. Such pre-pandemic statistics saw an exponential rise as COVID-19 swept the globe starting in early 2020. The situation is no different in the Philippines where the pandemic magnified not only the unpaid household and care work experienced by women but also exacerbated gender-based violence. This paper discusses how working women in the Philippines are burdened not only by the so-called second shift (Hochschild, 1989) but also by a more nuanced third shift (Kramarae, 2001) as they juggle the demands of work-from-home arrangements with their family responsibilities while navigating online education for themselves and their children in the midst of the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125967057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Policymakers should address the risk of the gradual disappearance of the physical workplace, and with it of the notion of choice in relation to remote working.
As segments of the workforce return to the workplace, employers should ensure the continuity of countermeasures to buffer isolation.
It will be essential for employers to introduce initiatives to prevent large segments of workers becoming at risk of physical and emotional exhaustion, and for governments to adapt occupational health and safety regulations accordingly.
The benefits of telework depend entirely on the degree of autonomy given to the worker and presuppose a culture of trust and compassion, two key traits for leaders to develop.
Ensuring equal access to ICT and that workers possess the education and skills needed to use them are fundamental challenges that policymakers need to address to prevent a ‘teleworkability’ divide."
{"title":"Teleworking in the Aftermath of the Covid-19 Pandemic: Enabling Conditions for a Successful Transition","authors":"Pierre Bérastégui","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3856979","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3856979","url":null,"abstract":"\"Policy implications:<br><br>Policymakers should address the risk of the gradual disappearance of the physical workplace, and with it of the notion of choice in relation to remote working.<br><br>As segments of the workforce return to the workplace, employers should ensure the continuity of countermeasures to buffer isolation.<br><br>It will be essential for employers to introduce initiatives to prevent large segments of workers becoming at risk of physical and emotional exhaustion, and for governments to adapt occupational health and safety regulations accordingly.<br><br>The benefits of telework depend entirely on the degree of autonomy given to the worker and presuppose a culture of trust and compassion, two key traits for leaders to develop.<br><br>Ensuring equal access to ICT and that workers possess the education and skills needed to use them are fundamental challenges that policymakers need to address to prevent a ‘teleworkability’ divide.\"","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117133617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On November 5, 2020, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance in the Department of Labor issued new rules codifying the procedures it will use to resolve equal employment issues. First, this paper summarizes the new rules focusing on how the agency will use and evaluate statistical evidence in its monitoring of government contractors’ compliance with equal employment laws. After noting the diminished role of statistical evidence in the new rules, the likely effect of them on the use of statistical data and analyses in equal employment proceedings are explored. The logical and statistical reasoning underlying several aspects of the new rules are also questioned. Because the new rules refer to a report of the Chamber of Commerce that, in part, criticized the agency from bringing a case against a firm, data from the case are re-analyzed. The statistical analysis provides support for the position of OFCCP.
2020年11月5日，劳工部联邦合同合规办公室发布了新规则，将其用于解决平等就业问题的程序编纂成法律。首先，本文总结了新规则，重点是该机构在监督政府承包商遵守平等就业法时如何使用和评估统计证据。在注意到统计证据在新规则中的作用减弱后，探讨了新规则对在平等就业诉讼中使用统计数据和分析可能产生的影响。新规则若干方面的逻辑和统计推理也受到质疑。由于新规定引用了美国商会(Chamber of Commerce)的一份报告，该报告在一定程度上批评了该机构对一家公司提起诉讼的做法，因此需要重新分析案件中的数据。统计分析为OFCCP的立场提供了支持。
{"title":"A Summary of the Statistical Aspects of the Procedures for Resolving Potential Employment Discrimination Recently Issued by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Along with a Commentary","authors":"J. Gastwirth","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3854884","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3854884","url":null,"abstract":"On November 5, 2020, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance in the Department of Labor issued new rules codifying the procedures it will use to resolve equal employment issues. First, this paper summarizes the new rules focusing on how the agency will use and evaluate statistical evidence in its monitoring of government contractors’ compliance with equal employment laws. After noting the diminished role of statistical evidence in the new rules, the likely effect of them on the use of statistical data and analyses in equal employment proceedings are explored. The logical and statistical reasoning underlying several aspects of the new rules are also questioned. Because the new rules refer to a report of the Chamber of Commerce that, in part, criticized the agency from bringing a case against a firm, data from the case are re-analyzed. The statistical analysis provides support for the position of OFCCP.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126641484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
V. Pulignano, M. Domecka, Karol Muszyński, Lander Vermeerbergen, M. Riemann
This working paper identifies some key areas of policy intervention for advancing socially sustainable and fair solutions for freelancers working in the creative industries, who are among those have suffered the most from the economic fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic.In particular, the authors focus on those who work entirely on their own account, without employees (i.e. the ‘solo self-employed’), and who undertake project- or task-based work on a fixed-term basis. While demand for some services (e.g. ICT services, software development, digital communication, media, medical translation and audiobooks) has grown, due to their digital nature or essentiality in the post-Covid reality, other types of creative work have suffered due to increased competition, decreased demand, or because they were entirely put on hold due to the pandemic.National government policy measures aimed at cushioning the impact of Covid-19 on workers’ livelihoods proved necessary but insufficient to guarantee long-term protection. This is because the eligibility criteria for such support measures exclude many freelancers in the creative industries. Moreover, those who have been guaranteed access to national government support are often confronted with the complexity and length of the administrative proceedings which accompany the implementation of these measures.Finally, career development and employability are vulnerable areas for freelancers due to there being a lack of (or insufficient) national funds dedicated to these areas.
{"title":"Creative Labour in the Era of Covid-19: The Case of Freelancers","authors":"V. Pulignano, M. Domecka, Karol Muszyński, Lander Vermeerbergen, M. Riemann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3832553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3832553","url":null,"abstract":"This working paper identifies some key areas of policy intervention for advancing socially sustainable and fair solutions for freelancers working in the creative industries, who are among those have suffered the most from the economic fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic.In particular, the authors focus on those who work entirely on their own account, without employees (i.e. the ‘solo self-employed’), and who undertake project- or task-based work on a fixed-term basis. While demand for some services (e.g. ICT services, software development, digital communication, media, medical translation and audiobooks) has grown, due to their digital nature or essentiality in the post-Covid reality, other types of creative work have suffered due to increased competition, decreased demand, or because they were entirely put on hold due to the pandemic.National government policy measures aimed at cushioning the impact of Covid-19 on workers’ livelihoods proved necessary but insufficient to guarantee long-term protection. This is because the eligibility criteria for such support measures exclude many freelancers in the creative industries. Moreover, those who have been guaranteed access to national government support are often confronted with the complexity and length of the administrative proceedings which accompany the implementation of these measures.Finally, career development and employability are vulnerable areas for freelancers due to there being a lack of (or insufficient) national funds dedicated to these areas.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130381217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Employers have used non-compete clauses to deprive tens of millions of workers of the freedom to change jobs or start their own businesses. In occupations ranging from home health aide to journalist and sandwich shop worker, employers have used this legal power to their great benefit. Non-compete clauses reduce worker mobility, help employers keep wages and wage growth down, deter small business formation, entrench potentially abusive, discriminatory, or hostile work environments, and fortify market power to the detriment of workers, rivals, consumers, and broader society. The justifications for non-compete clauses are unpersuasive. While employers and their advocates argue that they are necessary to protect investment in workers, such as trade secrets and training, there are at least three reasons to reject that reasoning. First, a broad dissemination of information across firms is often good for society. Second, non-competes are onerous for workers and a flawed means of protecting intangibles. Third, other measures, such as trade secret law and employment contracts, are more effective at protecting trade secrets and other intangibles and also much less restrictive for workers. Non-competes are merely one example of abusive contractual terms that the legal system has condoned or tolerated. Other terms, such as mandatory arbitration, class action waivers, confessions of judgment, and unilateral modification, reflect a ubiquitous economic and political problem. Corporations use these contractual terms to unilaterally rob consumers, suppliers, and workers of a wide range of constitutional and statutory rights. Like non-competes, these contractual terms are established in an environment of radical inequality between a corporation and a worker, consumer, or small business and are often contingent and non-salient to the person or business who must accept them. The result of these contracts of dispossession is the loss of legal recourse for wrongdoing, loss of possessions, and the imposition of unaccountable private governments. Congress should pursue a comprehensive legislative solution to contracts of dispossession. First, it should enact a comprehensive law banning these contracts of dispossession. Second, it should delegate authority to a federal agency to identify and outlaw novel contracts of dispossession in the future. These legislative reforms would remake contract law to liberate workers, consumers, and small businesses from the private rule of corporations.
{"title":"Non-Competes and Other Contracts of Dispossession","authors":"Sandeep Vaheesan, Matthew Buck","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3727043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3727043","url":null,"abstract":"Employers have used non-compete clauses to deprive tens of millions of workers of the freedom to change jobs or start their own businesses. In occupations ranging from home health aide to journalist and sandwich shop worker, employers have used this legal power to their great benefit. Non-compete clauses reduce worker mobility, help employers keep wages and wage growth down, deter small business formation, entrench potentially abusive, discriminatory, or hostile work environments, and fortify market power to the detriment of workers, rivals, consumers, and broader society. \u0000 \u0000The justifications for non-compete clauses are unpersuasive. While employers and their advocates argue that they are necessary to protect investment in workers, such as trade secrets and training, there are at least three reasons to reject that reasoning. First, a broad dissemination of information across firms is often good for society. Second, non-competes are onerous for workers and a flawed means of protecting intangibles. Third, other measures, such as trade secret law and employment contracts, are more effective at protecting trade secrets and other intangibles and also much less restrictive for workers. \u0000 \u0000Non-competes are merely one example of abusive contractual terms that the legal system has condoned or tolerated. Other terms, such as mandatory arbitration, class action waivers, confessions of judgment, and unilateral modification, reflect a ubiquitous economic and political problem. Corporations use these contractual terms to unilaterally rob consumers, suppliers, and workers of a wide range of constitutional and statutory rights. Like non-competes, these contractual terms are established in an environment of radical inequality between a corporation and a worker, consumer, or small business and are often contingent and non-salient to the person or business who must accept them. The result of these contracts of dispossession is the loss of legal recourse for wrongdoing, loss of possessions, and the imposition of unaccountable private governments. \u0000 \u0000Congress should pursue a comprehensive legislative solution to contracts of dispossession. First, it should enact a comprehensive law banning these contracts of dispossession. Second, it should delegate authority to a federal agency to identify and outlaw novel contracts of dispossession in the future. These legislative reforms would remake contract law to liberate workers, consumers, and small businesses from the private rule of corporations.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116868314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Caste oppression is real and present in our midst in the United States. In the Summer of 2020, several employees of large tech firms like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Cisco came forward with harrowing tales of workplace discrimination, including being paid less, denied promotions, and being mocked for their caste background. And, undoubtedly, the scourge of caste discrimination extends beyond Big Tech. While caste discrimination is in no sense new, these recent reports should serve as a needed wake-up call. Eradicating caste discrimination demands our immediate collective attention and action. As just one step in the complex and continuing fight to eradicate caste oppression, this Article contends that caste discrimination is cognizable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In particular, we argue that in light of our understanding of the caste system and the Supreme Court’s teaching in Bostock v. Clayton County, caste discrimination is a type of racial discrimination, religious discrimination, and national origin discrimination — all covered under Title VII. Recognizing caste discrimination as such provides potent tools to the relevant stakeholders to combat caste oppression. But more importantly, it also confers duties upon employers and government institutions to be vigilant in ensuring that employees are safeguarded from caste discrimination.
{"title":"Title VII and Caste Discrimination","authors":"G. Krishnamurthi, C. Krishnaswami","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3725938","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3725938","url":null,"abstract":"Caste oppression is real and present in our midst in the United States. In the Summer of 2020, several employees of large tech firms like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Cisco came forward with harrowing tales of workplace discrimination, including being paid less, denied promotions, and being mocked for their caste background. And, undoubtedly, the scourge of caste discrimination extends beyond Big Tech. While caste discrimination is in no sense new, these recent reports should serve as a needed wake-up call. Eradicating caste discrimination demands our immediate collective attention and action. \u0000 \u0000As just one step in the complex and continuing fight to eradicate caste oppression, this Article contends that caste discrimination is cognizable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In particular, we argue that in light of our understanding of the caste system and the Supreme Court’s teaching in Bostock v. Clayton County, caste discrimination is a type of racial discrimination, religious discrimination, and national origin discrimination — all covered under Title VII. Recognizing caste discrimination as such provides potent tools to the relevant stakeholders to combat caste oppression. But more importantly, it also confers duties upon employers and government institutions to be vigilant in ensuring that employees are safeguarded from caste discrimination.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123951837","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
According to a 2016 Time Magazine article, over 14 million people currently work in the “gig,” “on demand,” or “sharing” economy. In the past 10 years, 94% of net new jobs have appeared outside of traditional employment. The gig economy presents a paradox for workers in the United States. On its face, the “gig” economy represents the height of liberty. Part-time, temporary and platform workers are not tied to any single employer, and can theoretically choose when to work, and whom they want to work for. However, while workers in the gig economy enjoy nominal autonomy, they also lack many protections to which employees are legally entitled. Gig economy workers lack job security and must constantly search for new work. Most gig economy workers do not receive health insurance, pensions, or other benefits from their employers. The reality of the gig economy is greater economic inequality, insecurity, and precarity. The recent COVID crisis has exposed this reality and heightened the vulnerability of gig economy workers. Despite the promise of liberty in the gig economy, workers are increasingly subject to a new form of peonage, exploitative practices reminiscent of slavery and involuntary servitude. This article starts from first-hand accounts and empirical research and applies an inter-disciplinary approach to understanding what liberty of contract means, and can mean, to workers in the gig economy. It explores the ideology of liberty of contract and presents an alternative approach, the freedom from undue coercion promised by the Thirteenth Amendment. This is the first to article to consider what the Thirteenth Amendment could mean for gig economy workers. It draws on the work of labor scholars who have largely focused on the question of whether gig economy workers should be classified as employees, and constitutional scholars exploring what the promise of liberty in the Thirteenth Amendment means for United States workers. The Thirteenth Amendment offers a promise to these workers, a promise of freedom from undue coercion. However, that promise has yet to be enforced.
{"title":"The New Peonage: Liberty and Precarity for Workers in the Gig Economy","authors":"Rebecca E. Zietlow","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3641677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3641677","url":null,"abstract":"According to a 2016 Time Magazine article, over 14 million people currently work in the “gig,” “on demand,” or “sharing” economy. In the past 10 years, 94% of net new jobs have appeared outside of traditional employment. The gig economy presents a paradox for workers in the United States. On its face, the “gig” economy represents the height of liberty. Part-time, temporary and platform workers are not tied to any single employer, and can theoretically choose when to work, and whom they want to work for. However, while workers in the gig economy enjoy nominal autonomy, they also lack many protections to which employees are legally entitled. Gig economy workers lack job security and must constantly search for new work. Most gig economy workers do not receive health insurance, pensions, or other benefits from their employers. The reality of the gig economy is greater economic inequality, insecurity, and precarity. The recent COVID crisis has exposed this reality and heightened the vulnerability of gig economy workers. Despite the promise of liberty in the gig economy, workers are increasingly subject to a new form of peonage, exploitative practices reminiscent of slavery and involuntary servitude. \u0000 \u0000This article starts from first-hand accounts and empirical research and applies an inter-disciplinary approach to understanding what liberty of contract means, and can mean, to workers in the gig economy. It explores the ideology of liberty of contract and presents an alternative approach, the freedom from undue coercion promised by the Thirteenth Amendment. This is the first to article to consider what the Thirteenth Amendment could mean for gig economy workers. It draws on the work of labor scholars who have largely focused on the question of whether gig economy workers should be classified as employees, and constitutional scholars exploring what the promise of liberty in the Thirteenth Amendment means for United States workers. The Thirteenth Amendment offers a promise to these workers, a promise of freedom from undue coercion. However, that promise has yet to be enforced.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122669871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Envy and bullying are the two most common types of workplace violence. They happen when a perpetrator sabotages a target's productivity on purpose and inflicts physical or mental suffering on the target. Despite their potential to undermine the sustainability of the organization, envy and bullying are widely practiced. Given that legislation has been marginally successful in eradicating these aggressive behaviors from the workplace, we conjecture that there are economic reasons for their persistence. By modeling the dyadic relationship between a perpetrator and a target, we demonstrate that envy and bullying may be inherent in any organization that maximizes its output while retaining a level of stability, should its employees have heterogeneous levels of productivity. We find that there is an optimal level of violence that can steer the workplace towards an equilibrium. Based on this finding, we provide some suggestions that may help improve general working conditions.
{"title":"Modeling Envy and Bullying at Work","authors":"Zhe Peng, Zhuoyi Zhao","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3634551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3634551","url":null,"abstract":"Envy and bullying are the two most common types of workplace violence. They happen when a perpetrator sabotages a target's productivity on purpose and inflicts physical or mental suffering on the target. Despite their potential to undermine the sustainability of the organization, envy and bullying are widely practiced. Given that legislation has been marginally successful in eradicating these aggressive behaviors from the workplace, we conjecture that there are economic reasons for their persistence. By modeling the dyadic relationship between a perpetrator and a target, we demonstrate that envy and bullying may be inherent in any organization that maximizes its output while retaining a level of stability, should its employees have heterogeneous levels of productivity. We find that there is an optimal level of violence that can steer the workplace towards an equilibrium. Based on this finding, we provide some suggestions that may help improve general working conditions.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"60 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132815035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The research paper is based on the gender pay gap between men and women in India. The paper highlights the constitutional perspective and the rights that have been guaranteed under the Constitution of India in terms of providing equal opportunity to men and women. Further, the research is based on the recently formulated Code on wages Bill, 2019 that was introduced in the parliament to provide equal daily wages to men and women based on the work done and skills, as there is a problem in terms of providing daily wages to workers in India. The Code on wages Bill,2019 has been analysed and various significant challenges that it put forwards have been raised in the paper. Furthermore, the research highlights the gender pay gap between male and female athletes in terms of different sports and various existing policies that have been introduced for the same; and the need for a new policy to tackle a wide gap of wages between male and female athletes. The research is based on the constitutional perspective and the rights that have been enshrined in our constitution and how far states have provided these rights to men and women in terms of labour and sports in India.
{"title":"Equal Pay for Equal Work: Labour, Sports and Constitutional Perspective","authors":"H. Hussaini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3629148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3629148","url":null,"abstract":"The research paper is based on the gender pay gap between men and women in India. The paper highlights the constitutional perspective and the rights that have been guaranteed under the Constitution of India in terms of providing equal opportunity to men and women. Further, the research is based on the recently formulated Code on wages Bill, 2019 that was introduced in the parliament to provide equal daily wages to men and women based on the work done and skills, as there is a problem in terms of providing daily wages to workers in India. The Code on wages Bill,2019 has been analysed and various significant challenges that it put forwards have been raised in the paper. Furthermore, the research highlights the gender pay gap between male and female athletes in terms of different sports and various existing policies that have been introduced for the same; and the need for a new policy to tackle a wide gap of wages between male and female athletes. The research is based on the constitutional perspective and the rights that have been enshrined in our constitution and how far states have provided these rights to men and women in terms of labour and sports in India.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127513697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Labour law struggles to deal with the vertical disintegration of the enterprise that questions the traditional bilateral and contractual analysis of the employment relationship and the unitary concept of the employer. Multiple employer patterns have been proposed by the Italian and English scholarship to try to sidestep the current impasse. However, these seem to be inconsistent with the existing legal framework and, in addition, it is debatable that they can be always instrumental in addressing the issues arising from the vertical disintegration of the enterprise. Nevertheless, an alternative and more nuanced analytical path can be followed. Labour law mostly takes the view that the employer is the contractual counterparty to the employee. Yet it also recognises that other entities can assume certain responsibilities of the employer in certain specific regulatory domains, where legislators recur to peculiar regulatory strategies often independent of a contractual analysis of the employment relationship. This paper argues that the law takes this step not because these other legal entities are functionally akin to employers, but precisely in spite of the differences between them and the employer form. Rather than seeking to redefine the concept of employer, a better understanding of the subject must recognise that employment law consists in a kaleidoscopic blend of different regulatory domains, characterised by a range of different purposes, the achievement of which require the adoption of different and even non-contractual normative tools. Adopting a variable geometry approach to frame the scope of labour laws would constitute a better analytical response to potentially restore the coherence and completeness of the scope of employment protective norms.
{"title":"Adapting Labour Law to Complex Organisational Settings of the Enterprise. Why Re-Thinking the Concept of the Employer is not Enough","authors":"G. Gaudio","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3555913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3555913","url":null,"abstract":"Labour law struggles to deal with the vertical disintegration of the enterprise that questions the traditional bilateral and contractual analysis of the employment relationship and the unitary concept of the employer. Multiple employer patterns have been proposed by the Italian and English scholarship to try to sidestep the current impasse. However, these seem to be inconsistent with the existing legal framework and, in addition, it is debatable that they can be always instrumental in addressing the issues arising from the vertical disintegration of the enterprise. Nevertheless, an alternative and more nuanced analytical path can be followed. Labour law mostly takes the view that the employer is the contractual counterparty to the employee. Yet it also recognises that other entities can assume certain responsibilities of the employer in certain specific regulatory domains, where legislators recur to peculiar regulatory strategies often independent of a contractual analysis of the employment relationship. This paper argues that the law takes this step not because these other legal entities are functionally akin to employers, but precisely in spite of the differences between them and the employer form. Rather than seeking to redefine the concept of employer, a better understanding of the subject must recognise that employment law consists in a kaleidoscopic blend of different regulatory domains, characterised by a range of different purposes, the achievement of which require the adoption of different and even non-contractual normative tools. Adopting a variable geometry approach to frame the scope of labour laws would constitute a better analytical response to potentially restore the coherence and completeness of the scope of employment protective norms.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114243601","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：